linux-kernel - Re: Slow DOWN, please!!!

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 5 May 2008 13:04:31 +1000
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, rjw@...k.pl,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jirislaby@...il.com
Subject: Re: Slow DOWN, please!!!

On Thursday 01 May 2008 08:19:36 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> > And the people who stick these regressions into the tree need more
> > negative reinforcement.
>
> What we need is not 'negative reinforcement'.

Over time as patches succeed more I reduce testing so I can "get things done 
faster".  Eventually I screw up, and get more cautious on checking.  It's a 
dynamic balance.

With reduced review comes sloppier code.  If we can't increase review, we can 
at least increase the penalty for screwing up when I do get caught.

If vger dropped all my emails for a week after I broke the kernel, I'd be far 
more careful OR I'd find efficient ways to avoid doing that (like increasing 
review, or automated testing).  Either way, it's a win.

But I'm sure everyone else is far more disciplined than I...
Rusty.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/